Policy Studies

In March the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) certified that several new varieties of genetically engineered potatoes and apples are safe to eat, closely following the Department of Agriculture’s approval of them for unlimited cultivation and sale. The new products offer intriguing benefits. The newly approved “Innate” potato, for instance, is bruise-resistant (promising less waste) and contains considerably less of a chemical that is converted to a presumptive carcinogen when heated. The “Arctic” apple is designed to resist browning when cut.Such products will be welcome news to many consumers, but the bureaucratic ordeal was a tough row to hoe: the government’s regulation of these and similar products is a morass of unscientific policies, incompetence, and politics.

Support for a carbon tax has become the height of fashion among some on the right, and an express pass to "strange new respect" from the left. It even earned former congressman Bob Inglis (a Republican from South Carolina) the 2015 JFK Profile in Courage Award. Supposedly, the tax is at once a free-market economist's efficient approach to combating climate change, a savvy fiscal reform for promoting economic growth, and a statesman-like grand bargain poised to break through the political gridlock. But as with most fads, it makes little sense when scrutinized closely.

The turnaround in domestic oil production is the closest thing to an energy revolution to occur since 1973. The new oil boom has transformed the political landscape around energy policy. Yet it has also sparked a fierce new policy debate. The stakes in this debate are high, and it is being waged with much heat, but clear logic and sound evidence have both often been in short supply.

When it comes to climate change, the Republican Party need not theorize about conspiracies or hide behind ignorance. It should confront the facts as scientists generally understand them, as well as the limits of that understanding, and it should seek to empower innovators looking for solutions. The answer to the complex question of climate change will be neither a regulatory Rube Goldberg machine nor a massive new tax. Rather, conservatives should champion what they so frequently suggest as the best way to solve complex problems: policies that open the space for the private sector to innovate and adapt.

Building the Northeast Energy Direct Pipeline would result in 1,713 temporary jobs and $106 million in new production for the local economy. It would also lead to up to 12,025 new jobs in the long term, a $906 million increase in investment, and a $2.133 billion increase in real disposable income, or $770 per Massachusetts household.

If it takes two years to half-close the gap in current oil prices compared to the equilibrium price suggested by this study, it would be reasonable to expect the price of crude to rise at an annual rate of about eight dollars a barrel over the next 12 months.

Robert H. Nelson of the University of Maryland puts forth an alternative approach to national forest management—the creation of “charter forests.” Much like charter schools, the key principle of charter forests is freedom with accountability. Charter forests would be freed from the centralized administration of the Forest Service, and management would be devolved to individual autonomous forests capable of more creative and locally responsive management.

In 2014, Ohio became a national leader in energy policy when it suspended the state renewable energy and energy efficiency mandates. Since then, other states have repealed or have proposed the repeal of their energy mandates. Ohio can maintain its economic competitiveness by freeing its energy producers and consumers from state energy mandates.

The EPA is relentlessly anti-science, anti-technology and anti-industry. Its officials routinely ignore that regulation has costs, direct and indirect, and that enlightened regulation should always strive to limit the intrusiveness of oversight to the level that is necessary and sufficient. Policy by policy and decision by decision, the EPA (with significant help from other regulatory agencies) has decimated the nation's competitiveness, ability to innovate, and capacity to create wealth. An analysis from the Competitive Enterprise Institute estimated that the annual cost of compliance with EPA regulations alone is more than a third of a trillion dollars. (That’s more than 30,000 fatalities per year, using the $10 million figure.)

The Keystone XL pipeline has the potential to bring huge gains to the United States, including energy independence, increased security and jobs. The $8 billion, 1,179 mile line, to be operated by Canadian firm TransCanada, would run from Montana to Nebraska and deliver an estimated 830,000 barrels a day of crude to refineries located along the gulf coast. At today’s price of crude at $51.76, this would gross over $42 million dollars a day or roughly $15 billion per year. TransCanada has waited since September 2008 for authorization of the pipeline. With crude oil prices at a 10 year low, approximately $175 billion in economic activity has been unrealized due to the delay.